this game will have to be nothing short of amazing....it'll have to get a 10 from the GI reviewer for me to purchase it...I love Battlefield...but I'm super-jaded on the FPS genre. Overcrowded with junk.

Well I'm guessing DICE will be holding a chair when they come out to show this and then throw it down when they're done. Next to Old Republic, you know this will be one of EA's main attractions and co-op is always a welcome bonus (as long as it fits of course). Like I said before too, I want to see a level or maps at nighttime.

This is where you console guys are gonna get the first true taste of what PC gamers like myself have been drooling over for close to a decade. Battlefield is in my own opinion, one of the greatest multiplayer war games to ever grace gaming period. And just for the record, I also like CoD, just don't think it will compare.

Yes. Battlefield 3 looks amazing! But only on PC....and sadly i dont have a good enuff PC to run it. I remember playing BF2 everyday when i came home from school. Ive played BF1943, BFBC1/BC2, and now im waiting for the fother of all BAttlefields. I got it reserved, but im about to Un-reserve it if DICE dosent do something about the 24 players on consolse. This is not about PC vs Consoles, its about getting your moneys worth.This is not coming from some COD fanboy -- This is a sincere plea from a true Battlefield Veteran and fan of the series.Asking DICE to rase it from 24 to 48 or 32 players, because i know for a fact that a PS3 or Xbox can run more that 24 players. I know consoles cant Run 64 players on BF3 but both the PS3 and Xbox are more advanced than any computer with hardwear from the year 2000, so if a computer from that year can do 64 players a PS3 can do 48 players.Now is the time to stand up and demand a true Battlefield game for consoles.A BF3 with only 24 players si like a sequal to BFbc2....If BF3 on conosles will only get 24, DICE better rename it Battlfield BadCompany 3.

Patrick - "A lot of people ask us about 64 versus 128 or 256 players. Technically, we can go to 256, we’ve tried it. We play tested with 128. You’ve got to make a game that’s fun to play. And, arguably, we think that the most fun you can have is when it’s between 32 and 40 players. And we’ve done substantial research into this and tested 128 and that it’s not fun." What is interesting is the fact that if this is true, why is the PC and especially the console versions out of this "fun zone" they found in "research"? There is no doubt that Battlefield hopes to dethrone Call of Duty as the best military shooter. As a long time fan of the series, I want nothing more than to finally see a real version of the game on consoles that feels like the game I fell in love with in 2005. If EA really wants to dethrone COD then don’t hold back, find a way to make it work. If it’s not 64 players then why not 48? 36? 32?